Jakobsen has been studying developments in NATO after the Cold War. He has used several different indicators to investigate whether Europe contributes enough in terms of defence spending, the number of soldiers and people’s willingness to fight for their country. The results were published in the journal European Security.

“The end of the Cold War made it possible to reduce defence budgets, which some European NATO countries took advantage of,” said Associate Professor Gunnar Fermann in the same department. Fermann has recently published a book on the dynamics of military alliances and restrictions that states impose on how their forces may be used when participating in coalition operations.

“The war on terror” since 2001 has undoubtedly involved some countries more than others. Photo: Shutterstock, NTB Scanpix

Fewer soldiers, and less money and will to fight

“Since the Cold War, the European NATO members have generally reduced their defence spending,” says Jakobsen.

Most European countries spend less on defence as measured by a share of the gross domestic product (GDP) than they did a few decades ago. Using only this measurement method, Trump is quite right.

“Europe has also largely abolished compulsory military service and reduced troop numbers,” says Jakobsen.

This is yet another indicator that the US president actually has a point.

“The European self-reported willingness to fight has also been quite low since the end of the Cold War, especially in countries that have US military bases,” Jakobsen says.

Fermann points to Germany as a particularly interesting case.

“NATO member Germany reduced defence spending sharply after the Cold War. Today, German military spending is 1.2 per cent of its GDP, in contrast to the US, which spends 3.6 per cent of its GDP on defence,” he says.

Germany appears to be a military dwarf relative to its economic importance and strategic position in Europe, Fermann adds.

“You don’t have to be an American, or Trump, to think that this doesn’t quite fit at a time when the tension in Europe is rising again,” says Fermann.

Assorted threat perceptions

In other words, it’s not a bright picture for anyone who wants to defend Europe’s NATO efforts in recent years. Today, only the UK, Greece, Romania, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have met NATO’s target of 2 per cent of their GDP for defence spending. Norway, by comparison, invests 1.54 per cent of its GDP in its Armed Forces. But the situation is not quite that simple.

New NATO countries

Since the Cold War, the following countries have become new members of NATO:

“This development could also be because political conditions are not perceived to be as threatening in Europe as they were during the Cold War,” Jakobsen says.

But Fermann believes that European NATO countries need to take into account the recent increased tension between NATO and Russia.

The Russian intervention in Georgia in 2008, the tug of war between alliance systems for Ukraine’s allegiance and the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 moved several countries to increase their defence efforts again.

The nations that became NATO members after the Cold War, which were generally Eastern European states near Russia, have generally been more concerned about territorial defence.

“For Germany, the security picture is more complicated. As a member of NATO, German authorities have to maintain alliance solidarity in the geopolitical competition between the United States and Russia. At the same time, Germany cooperates extensively with Russia, particularly around energy, which both Poland and the United States view sceptically. This creates conflicting security policy interests that are reflected in Germany’s relatively low defence investments,” says Fermann.

Article continues below photo.

US Army Rangers. Should the United States pay the most to defend Europe? Photo: Shutterstock, NTB Scanpix

Burden sharing

Traditionally, burden sharing in NATO is measured as the percentage of gross domestic product that prioritizes military defence purposes.

“NATO’s 2 per cent target from 2014 is a mechanism for curbing freeloading states within an alliance that is confronting a possible new cold war with Russia,” says Fermann.

The defence budget’s share of GDP also served as the primary measure of alliance solidarity in NATO during the previous cold war from 1949 to 1989.

In the period of detente between NATO and Russia from 1990 to 2014, on the other hand, the Alliance-leading United States viewed the members’ strategic contribution to NATO less in terms of money and more in terms of their ability to deliver powerful military strength to coalition operations in distant regions.

“But we have to be careful about judging whether Europe has been freeloading. It depends entirely on which indicators you use,” says Professor Jacobsen.

This view is linked to the numerous civil war conflicts, in particular the “war on terror,” that have needed to be dealt with. European NATO countries have participated actively in coalition operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, for example, but to varying degrees.

The United Kingdom, Poland and Denmark have contributed significant troops without major restrictions on the use of force. Germany, by contrast, has been among the more restrained NATO countries, imposing considerable restrictions on the use of force on its troops in Afghanistan.

“National reservations on the use of force in coalition operations reduce military efficiency and have contributed to NATO’s struggle to reach its political goals in Afghanistan,” said Fermann, who has studied alliances and reservations in depth.

American criticism nothing new

American demands that European NATO countries contribute more is not a phenomenon that arose with Trump. Photo: Shutterstock, NTB Scanpix

President Trump is by no means alone in promoting American criticism of European NATO efforts.

“American demands that European NATO countries contribute more isn’t a phenomenon that arose with Trump,” says Fermann.

President George W. Bush wanted European NATO members to make greater and better contributions to coalition operations in the Middle East and Asia. NATO’s 2005 summit in Riga raised issues related to the fact that several European countries imposed special restrictions on their own troops’ use of force.

Later, President Barack Obama became irritated at countries that he perceived to be freeloaders. He threatened the UK with ending their countries’ “special relationship” unless the UK increased its defence spending. With simultaneous conflicts in several areas, Obama wanted to concentrate more on Asia, but this required European NATO members to take more responsibility in their own regions.

Trump’s desire to reduce US military involvement in Afghanistan and Syria and his demands for greater European efforts in many ways continue the assessment of former US presidents that the United States also needs to prioritize resources.

“If the Europeans want to take greater control of what is in their security policy interests, it follows that European countries must take greater financial responsibility for their own security. You can’t lead from behind,” says Fermann.

No unified voice

But European countries aren’t of one mind in their security policy analyses. Internal disagreements among European NATO members are camouflaged by Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron’s rhetorical disputes with Trump. Similarly, Trump’s administration cannot be said to speak with a unified voice.

Fermann believes this will remain a paradox and a challenge as long as NATO and the United States stay locked into European security architecture.

As far back as 1969, the Nixon administration felt that NATO burdens needed to be distributed more fairly among the member countries.

“But we have to be careful about judging whether Europe has been freeloading. It depends entirely on which indicators you use,” says Jakobsen.

CONTACT

RELATED ARTICLES

War veterans who were not personally in life-threatening danger have more psychological problems than those who were injured by gunfire. This finding comes from a study that surveyed veterans after their return from Afghanistan.

An international team of researchers has concluded that operational funding should continue to be provided for the production of renewable energy in Europe, provided that such support is progressively reduced over time.

MORE NORWEGIAN SCITECH NEWS

LOADING CONTENT

Privacy Policy

The Privacy Statement is about how this website collects and uses visitor information. The statement contains information that you are entitled to when collecting information from our website, and general information about how we treat personal data.The legal owner of the website is the processing officer for the processing of personal data. It is voluntary for those who visit the web sites to provide personal information regarding services such as receiving newsletters and using the sharing and tip services. The treatment basis is the consent of the individual, unless otherwise specified.

1. Web analytics and cookies (cookies)

As an important part of the effort to create a user-friendly website, we look at the user pattern of those who visit the site. To analyze the information, we use the Google Analytics analysis tool.Google Analytics uses cookies (small text files that the site stores on the user's computer), which registers the users' IP address and provides information about the individual user's online movements. Examples of what the statistics give us answers to are; how many people visit different pages, how long the visit lasts, what websites users come from and what browsers are used. None of the cookies allow us to link information about your use of the site to you as an individual.The information collected by Google Analytics is stored on Google servers in the U.S.. The information received is subject to the Google Privacy Policy.An IP address is defined as a personal information because it can be traced back to a particular hardware and thus to an individual. We use Google Analytics's tracking code to anonymize the IP address before the information is stored and processed by Google. Thus, the stored IP address can not be used to identify the individual user.

2. Search

If the webpage has search function, it stores information about what keywords users use in Google Analytics. The purpose of the storage is to improve our information service. The search usage pattern is stored in aggregate form. Only the keyword is saved and they can not be linked to other information about the users, such as the IP addresses.

3. Share / Tips service

The "Share with others" feature can be used to forward links to the site by email, or to share the content of social networking. Tips for tips are not logged with us, but only used to add the tips to the community. However, we can not guarantee that the online community does not log this information. All such services should therefore be used wisely. If you use the email feature, we only use the provided email addresses to resend the message without any form of storage.

4. Newsletter

The website can send out newsletters by email if you have registered to receive this. In order for us to be able to send e-mail, you must register an e-mail address. Mailchimp is the data processor for the newsletter. The e-mail address is stored in a separate database, not shared with others and deleted when you unsubscribe. The e-mail address will also be deleted if we receive feedback that it is not active.

5. Registration, form

The website may have a form for registration, contact form or other form. These forms are available to the public to perform the tasks they are supposed to do.Registration form is for visitors to sign up or register.Contact form is for visitors to easily send a message to the website's contact person.We ask for the name of the sender and contact information for this. Personal information we receive is not used for purposes other than responding to the inquiry.The form is sent as email via Mailgun as a third party solution. The entire submission will be stored at Mailgun for 24 hours. Between 24 hours and 30 days, only mailheader is stored before the submission is deleted after 30 days. The reason for this storage is to confirm whether emails are sent from the website and forwarded to the correct recipient.Once the email is received by the recipient, it is up to the recipient to determine the data processing needs of the email.

6. Page and service functionality

Cookies are used in the operation and presentation of data from websites. Such cookies may contain language code information for languages ​​selected by the user. There may be cookies with information supporting the load balancing of the system, ensuring all users the best possible experience. For services that require login or search, cookies can be used to ensure that the service presents data to the right recipient.